几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-15, 11:30 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 slab-in-grade concrete pad with precast trench

slab-in-grade concrete pad with precast trench
i am not a structural engineer, but i wish to consult with others if what i have here is a problem.
what i am showing (attached) is a slab in grade pad with a concrete precast u-trench section on top, and the pad is about 347" x 120". the actually rebar dimensions are d16, at 150mm (or 6") spacing, top to bottom. the way our contractor do this is first pour the bottom part, where i indicated it in red line. let it cured, then place the precast, and pour the rest. there is actually rebar connection between the top and bottom pour, it just that it is 2 different pours, and some people were extremely concerned now we have a split pad at the horizontal plane, and it is "cold joint". they claimed there will be a problem if we have an earthquake. and because of that, they want one monolithic pour, instead of 2 separate pours. but my reasoning is, they are joined by the d16 rebars, it would be just like placing a concrete pad on a mud slab, where is there such a big different for a slab in grade. also, just to clarify, the top slab is elevated above grade by 2", the rest will be backfilled.
i am not structural engineer, but i just want to understand if there is truly a big issue here. also the equipment that will be placed on this is about 50,000lbs.
i don't have a great problem with your contractor's sequence, but i do with the way the reinforcing is detailed. the bars which are bent under the trench should instead go to the bottom of the pad. use another layer of bars under the trench. you should have some on the face of the pad as well. and all bars should be developed rather than just stopping past a corner.
any horizontal load in the slab will need to transfer down into the "mudslab" and then transfer back up on the other side of the trench.
ideally the rebar would be developed on both sides of the control joint.

actually, that was the design drawing that shows this slab was designed to be monolithically poured, rather than in stages. i am attaching a similar shop drawing which is what the contractor shows in his shop drawing, and it has rebars in vertically. see the lines and dots in red. the contractor did the way he did so that the precast trench can be laid in after the concrete has been formed for a few days, rather than building a form to support the precast.
again, this is a case that shows the differnece between the design and method of construction.
the contractor's drawing is better than the original design drawing. however, the horizontal leg of that u bar under the trench should not be that high, it should be down below. and the diagonal bar at the setdown should extend to the top.
thanks. the horizontal bar under the u-trench is currently below the first pour surface by approx 4". in any case, even with the rebars, does anyone feel the contractor proposal, which has more rebar to account for the 2 different pours (or 2 layers), is any more inferior than the original monolithic pour design. is the cold joint between the 2 layers an issue? and the concern about hte lateral stress due to earthquake? i am assuming the contractor picked this method is because this allows him to sit the u-trench propoerly before he before the top layer. i am not certain if putting up a form to sit the u-trench is easily doable because of the weight of the u-trench, and also if it is easy to make sure the pour underneathh the trnech will be a good mix free if air voids, when pouring underneath the u-trench's form that is not easy to get access to. what's your opinionon that?
the contractor's approach is definitely better than the original design.
hi hokie66, thanks. i am very happy to hear that opinion.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
slab on grade problem huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 11:24 PM
how to thicken an existing concrete slab on grade huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-09 05:54 PM
crack in old floor slab huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 02:20 PM
concrete spec. for slab-on-grade huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 12:49 PM
concrete roof slab load huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 12:34 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 04:14 PM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多